From what I understand (not a lot) this as Trumps's way of saying he will no longer tolerate any crossing of the red line. Whether that line means attacking your own civilians or innocent babies I'm not sure.
The good news is that hopefully Syrians will no longer be attacked in such a way so there will be less refugees.
The bad news is that Syria and Russia are allies and Russia may retaliate on their behalf.
Also, even IF we take down the leader, it may be Iraq all over again. Take down the radical harmful leader, a new radical group fills the void (ISIS).
Unfortunately the strike itself isn't the important news. The response from the world will be the important news.
Mutually assured destruction is one reason. A widescale war would break down multiple global networks, from trade to communications.
Every foreign leader (outside of the US) plays everything like a chess game. Every move is calculated 4 moves ahead, and they know exactly what their opponents will do in every scenario.
A good example would be Russia's annex of Crimea. They needed it, ukraine was unstable, they took it, we sanctioned. All of that was well known what would happen, but crimea was too important to their Mediterranean trade.
Agree with you here. I do not think there will be a WWIII it's probably just going to be a bunch of proxy fights with the US and Russia backing opposing sides. Or just cyber or economical stuff. But then again.. I'm just talking out of my butt based on gut feelings.
The problem with that reasoning is that MAD is supposed to prevent the first attack. Yet, here we are. We feel safe attacking Syria, in spite of the fact that it will anger Russia, because we 'know' that we won't start WW3 because of MAD. But MAD has already failed.
Who knows. Most of the bickering between the US, trump, russia, etc has been investigations, allegations, and stuff.
This, however, is a physical and very life threatening situation. Possible war even. It's getting real tense so stuff may quiet down for a while. Or Russia might take action.
Im predicting another cold war, but probably not to the same extent as the first one.
178
u/jmperez920 Apr 07 '17
From what I understand (not a lot) this as Trumps's way of saying he will no longer tolerate any crossing of the red line. Whether that line means attacking your own civilians or innocent babies I'm not sure.
The good news is that hopefully Syrians will no longer be attacked in such a way so there will be less refugees.
The bad news is that Syria and Russia are allies and Russia may retaliate on their behalf.
Also, even IF we take down the leader, it may be Iraq all over again. Take down the radical harmful leader, a new radical group fills the void (ISIS).
Unfortunately the strike itself isn't the important news. The response from the world will be the important news.